D8

Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

2 Comment(s)

Factory farms also cruel

To The Editor:

Concerning the campaign to help stop animal cruelty, Brian Murphy is to be commended for his letter to the editor.

His thoughts on this subject as a father, lawyer and politician were enlightening and thought-provoking. Also, judging by the incredible amount of letters sent to this forum on the abuse of pets, his support of Bill C-229 will surely be applauded by many animal lovers.

However, there is one aspect of this Bill that seems vague. Does it only safeguard pets or are farm animals also protected against unconscionable and abusive treatment? In particular, could Mr. Murphy express his personal views on the subject of animal cruelty in regard to factory farming?

Could he also tell us if this controversial type of farming has ever been discussed during caucus meetings when Bill C-229 was on the agenda? If not, would Mr. Murphy accept to show the following video to his caucus members ?

(It was secretly shot in 2007 on a large Quebec factory farm that produces foie gras and shows what many people would consider to be severe animal abuse). Would Mr. Murphy be willing to ask his fellow caucus members to support him in proposing that specific amendments be included in Bill C-229 to close the loopholes in the Criminal Code that permit factory farms to legally subject unacceptable suffering upon animals in order to maximize profits?

Many readers have probably never heard of the cruelty and abuse involved in factory farming because the lobbyists and lawyers who work for the large agribusiness corporations who own these farms have cleverly kept most of this information hidden from the public.

I am not even allowed by this newspaper to describe factory farming in this article because the details are too horrific. If you want to find out how factory farms abuse animals, pollute the environment and pose unnecessary risks to our health, your best alternative is to Google "Factory Farming".

Marcel Cormier,

Dieppe

Letter writer missed point

To The Editor:

Some points of clarification are needed regarding Tuesday's letter to the editor from Mrs. Violet Ward regarding my recent plea to the Government of Canada to re-examine Liberal MP Mark Holland's private members' bill -- designed to close loopholes within our Criminal Code that allow animal abusers to get off without adequate punishment.

I have maintained that Bill S-203 was a good start but does not go far enough in giving our courts the muscle they need to swiftly prosecute those who feel the need to abuse helpless animals.

Mrs Ward's quick condemnation of me without checking the facts is part of the issue MPs face when trying to ensure the right things get done in Ottawa. In a simple 120-word letter she gives inaccurate information about my voting record, gives the impression that all MPs are dragging their feet on passing this Bill (As I mentioned in my letter on Saturday -- the NB Liberal Caucus supports Mr. Holland's Bill -- a Caucus Committee I chair!) and she throws the entire responsibility back on elected officials without recognizing she and other citizens have a role to play.

The reality is this. While we support moving forward with Bill C-229, the Conservative government has given no indication they will support this. Without the support of ALL opposition parties for the bill, it may not make it through the House.

That's why we need support from Canadians -- pressuring their MP to support this or similar legislation that does what we all want -- ensure that those who abuse animals are swiftly and properly punished.

Mrs. Ward is right about one thing. Our federal politicians can adopt changes to the Criminal Code that allow animal abusers to be properly prosecuted. I support this. My fellow Liberal MPs support this. I have called upon the Conservative government to support this. Now it's time for everyone to ask their MP to support this -- including Mrs Ward.

Brian F.P. Murphy,

Member of Parliament,

Moncton-Riverview-

Dieppe

Return forests to the people

To The Editor:

Well now, a downturn in the economy, how can you tell? The workers of rural N.B. can't tell except that we might get five more weeks of EI.

How about letting us work in our own forests which the politicians and big business took from us. They make us so poor we can't even pay attention, instead of giving us access to our own resources.

I have a small cedar mill and I can't even have a stick of wood from Crown land on my property, under any circumstance. The big companies can get a licence to cut Crown land wood but not small, independent contractors.

As a matter of fact, I know of a cedar mill in St. Paul that is going out of business. He could not get access to Crown land wood after trying for 10 years.

We don't need a stimulus package, all we need is a chance to get back what was taken from the woods workers about 30 years ago, when the government at the time stopped allowing small contractors access to the woods resources the people of the province had since there was a province.

Now, I don't like to mention the "I" guys but, well, I do really, since they and other multinationals are taking all our forest products and leaving us with five more weeks of EI. I know we could all run out and work for them but then there is that downturn in the economy.

How about allowing us to have a few sticks of our own wood, even firewood and we will make our own way thank you very much. Oh, and by the way, what numbskull decided to put GST on firewood?

Firewood is something poor people use and should be exempt from GST, nobody pays it anyway, and rightly so.

Wait, the people who made the law don't heat with firewood, they only use it at Christmas time in their fireplace. Merry Christmas.

Anthony Fahey,

Harcourt

Navigable waters need protection

To The Editor:

I am extremely concerned about the federal government's plan to amend the Navigable Waters Protection Act under the Budget Implementation Act, 2009.

The proposed amendments would allow ministerial approval of development projects potentially impacting navigable waterways without the requirement of a federal environmental assessment or public consultation.

Have we not learned from our past mistakes? The Petitcodiac River in New Brunswick is a prime example where the absence of an environmental assessment resulted in significant negative environmental effects.

Not only is the environment being threatened, but the rights of Canadians to enjoy free access to waterways (eg. for recreation) is being undermined.

Minister of Transportation, Infrastructure and Communities John Baird and Prime Minister Stephen Harper are walking a fine line; while trying to revive the economy they are threatening the environment.

It is time that we took a step forward instead of another step back to ensure the protection of the environment.

Sarah Blake-Dickson,

Moncton